The fragmented and depressing mayor’s race in Los Angeles offers few solutions to the city’s problems

RUSSELL CROWE is not the only person whose future will shortly be decided by voters in Los Angeles. But the chances of an Oscar for the star of “Gladiator” seem to have generated far more debate than the prospect of a new mayor. Richard Riordan, the current mayor, must step down after serving his limit of two terms. He will leave a city more sure of itself than when he took office eight years ago, but still dissatisfied with its schools, its police force and its traffic—and largely uninterested in politics.

Los Angeles has issues aplenty: an imminent Latino majority in the city, police scandals, a looming Hollywood strike, the secession of the San Fernando Valley from the rest of the city, some of the worst schools in the country, and its first electricity blackout this week. Yet none of the candidates in the April 10th election seems to have grabbed the attention of voters in the way that Mr Riordan, a wealthy Republican businessman, did in 1993. Of the 24 candidates running, six have a shot at victory, and no one is likely to get a clear majority. This will ensure a run-off between the top two candidates on June 5th. Angelenos are distinctly unenthused by this. Only 30% of those who can vote, will.

One candidate in the run-off will almost certainly be James Hahn. Mr Hahn, a Democrat, led the pack in a recent poll by the Los Angeles Times, with 24% of likely voters saying they planned to vote for him, double the share for any of the other candidates. He has the advantage of a widely recognised name and a loyal following among blacks. Both came thanks to his late father, Kenneth Hahn, a county supervisor for 40 years, who delivered a steady flow of parks, hospitals, and emergency services to his constituents.

His son first won office as a city controller, and he is now city attorney. Term limits (which are taking effect for the first time in this election) have forced him to look beyond this job. Mr Hahn has achievements of his own to point to, including tackling gangs, and pursuing polluters and tobacco firms. But being an insider has a downside, too. After being involved for so long, Mr Hahn is not as free to criticise the city's shortcomings as some of his rivals are. The recent scandal inside the Rampart division of the Los Angeles Police Department, for example, cuts both ways. Mr Hahn has won praise for negotiating a “consent decree” under which the federal government would assume some control over the LAPD. But his office was slow to respond to allegations against the officer at the heart of the scandal, who later confessed to intimidation and murder.

Among Mr Hahn's five leading rivals, none can credibly be called an outsider. Two hold city posts, two come from jobs in Sacramento, the state capital, and one is a congressman in Washington for a district in Los Angeles.

Symptomatically, the loudest critic of the status quo is the candidate with the longest involvement in LA politics. Joel Wachs first ran for mayor in 1973, and has been a member of the city council for 30 years. He has started populist battles against developers over tax subsidies for a downtown sports stadium, against the city utility over electricity rates for the old and against landlords over rent. His critics say he is more interested in stirring things up than solving them. But he is popular with gay and Jewish voters and in the (largely white) San Fernando Valley, where 40% of Angelenos live.

Mr Wachs, originally a Republican, is running as an independent. He may lose votes to the only official Republican in the race, Steven Soboroff, who is a protégé of Mr Riordan. A successful property-developer, he was called in by the mayor in 1993 to help build a railway line between the harbour and downtown. Mr Soboroff then became LA's parks commissioner, which put him in charge of school playgrounds and thus into a succession of battles with LA's overwhelmed school system. As mayor, he promises more of his brisk businessman's approach.

If her performance in the televised debates counted for anything, Kathleen Connell might have her chance. But fewer people watch such things than go to Spago's Oscars party. As state controller (she is another victim of term limits) she has been a contentious figure, even picking a fight with her fellow Democrat Governor Gray Davis over the electricity crisis. But she lacks a solid LA base, and trails the pack.

Mr Hahn's most likely rival in the run-off is another figure from Sacramento, Antonio Villaraigosa. The best known Latino in an increasingly Latino city, he is running neck-and-neck with Mr Soboroff, with 12% support in a recent Los Angeles Times poll. Mr Villaraigosa used to be speaker of the state assembly, but he has been back in his home town campaigning for almost a year, competing with Mr Hahn for endorsements from environmentalists, women's groups and, especially, unions (all of whom tend to vote). He also has the blessing of Mr Davis.

Mr Villaraigosa's campaign is complicated, however, by the presence in the race of another Latino candidate, Xavier Becerra, a representative for the 30th congressional district, who shares an office building with him. Well-regarded within the national Democratic Party but less well known in Los Angeles, Mr Becerra is actually the most popular candidate with Latino voters (with about 30% of their vote). That ought to make a big difference, but won't: despite making up 45% of the city, Latinos will probably cast only 20% of the votes.

And then what?

If Los Angeles represents the future of America—and it often does—then the mayor's race should scare the whole country. A group of career politicians is paying court to a clutch of local interest groups, largely ignoring the bigger issues facing the city; most potential voters are ignoring the whole business; there is a feeling that local government cannot really do anything, and a sense that politics lags demographics. Even if Mr Villaraigosa wins, the electorate will be far whiter, richer and older than the city as a whole.

One irony of this process is that, even if the candidates can escape such issues during the campaign, whoever becomes mayor will need to tackle them head on. One immediate challenge will be whether to reappoint Bernard Parks, the chief of police. Mr Wachs, who has said he would not, is the only candidate not to fudge this question. Another problem is what to do about the city's currently independent school board. All the candidates have waffled about increasing its accountability; nobody seems willing to follow the example of Chicago and to put it under the mayor's control.

Then there is secession. Discontent about those schools and the distribution of city construction projects has spawned separatists not just in the San Fernando Valley, but also in Hollywood and the area around the harbour. No candidate has yet made a firm statement about secession. Opposition would alienate those precious votes in the Valley; support would drive away public-sector unions. Each candidate has chosen his or her own mealy-mouthed formula to put off the issue until after the election. One of them will have to come clean.